By C.W. Nevius
San Francisco Chronicle
SAN FRANCISCO — For decades there has been confusion and general inaction when it comes to the hundreds and hundreds of citations that police give to aggressive panhandlers and those who drink and urinate on San Francisco’s streets. But there might soon be a plan in place to hold the worst offenders accountable.
Spurred by a Chronicle story earlier this month that detailed how the citations are regularly dismissed, thrown out or simply ignored, representatives of the Police Department, mayor’s office, district attorney and Superior Court have put together a series of proposals that should significantly improve the handling of these so-called quality-of-life infractions.
The plan focuses on chronic lawbreakers - those who rack up dozens of citations over a few months - and require them to appear at court. Currently, chronic offenders shrug off infractions. If they don’t show up at court - and they rarely do - a bench warrant is issued, but it hardly ever results in any consequences.
“We want to look at the process for the top 40 offenders,” said Dariush Kayhan, the city’s homeless policy director. “We want to be able to flag these people, require them to show up in court and then have the judge walk them through all the violations that have occurred.”
There are concerns
These worst-of-the-worst wouldn’t have each citation viewed in a vacuum; rather, the magnitude of their repeat offenses would become a factor.
Court officials have concerns. Superior Court Executive Officer Michael Yuen said they worry that looking at a list of prior offenses could compromise the concept of “judicial neutrality,” meaning that judges should hear each case on its own merits. However, he said, there is room for compromise.
“We think there may be a little more objective way to do it. What would be ideal would be to get the defendants to appear in court,” he said.
No kidding.
“We just start the process,” said Tenderloin Station police Capt. Joe Garrity. “You can’t just cite the guys and have no follow-up.”
Kayhan is proposing that the police should be made aware of the chronic courtroom no-shows who ignore their citations. Then, when a bench warrant is issued, the police could use that to arrest them and force them into court.
The idea is similar to the Community Justice Center. When defendants appear there for low-level felonies, they can choose between jail time or accepting services like alcohol and drug treatment and housing.
Do something
Clearly something must be done.
The current system for dealing with these people is messy, confusing and outright counterproductive. The district attorney’s office recently learned that the court has been scheduling hearings and dismissing citation cases without prosecutors’ knowledge. Apparently, the rationale was that if the D.A.'s office wasn’t objecting to the dismissals, it approved.
Under this new agreement, the calendar for those cases will be provided to the D.A.'s office and attorneys will have a chance to object before infractions are dismissed.
“Our concern is accountability,” said Assistant District Attorney Paul Henderson, who is running for district attorney. “I’m excited that people are now coming to the table and want to work to improve the system.”
Another common practice is to dismiss infractions for time served in jail. If a defendant had racked up dozens of minor citations but then was arrested for something else, the citations were often dismissed because he spent some time in custody, albeit for a different crime. Kayhan said that needs to stop.
Finger-pointing
But talk is cheap. Let’s see if something really happens. The good news is that not only are the right people getting involved, as Yuen says, “there has been very little finger-pointing.”
In truth, there actually has been a lot of it. Tourists continue to flock to San Francisco, but as they tell us in e-mails and letters, they are often shocked by the mess.
Take the case of a frequent offender who hangs out next to the Powell BART Station, “drinking and terrorizing tourists,” in the words of a city official. In a 35-day period he was cited 21 times, but never held accountable.
It has taken years, but the city is finally realizing that doesn’t make sense.
“We want to look at the process for the top 40 offenders. We want to be able to flag these people, require them to show up in court and then have the judge walk them through all the violations that have occurred.”